Anti-War Movement Plan

[ConclamoLudus]

I am pleading the anti-war movement to come to a better solution than what's on the table. Get unified and come up with something, a detailed plan on disarming Saddam Hussein that doesn't involve any threat of use of force. Those are the only stipulations. Use details, i.e. How long do we give inspectors, etc. If you can agree on it you could even start sending it out to people. Its very easy to dismiss the anti-war people as just anti-Bush, because there aren't any solutions being offered up instead. Strengthen your arguement with a plan.

Convince me...please

Seriously

 

[StageLeft]

All the anti-war movement says is "more time for inspectors". News flash: Without war Saddamn will NEVER go along with inspections fully and will always be bending the rules and sneaking things by.

The question is whether war is worth it as a last resort to disarm him. Because it is the last resort. There are no other ones. If you think it's worth it as a last resort then put that billboard down.

 

[flavio]

Damn, you had to take it to a new thread. I replied in the other thread maybe I'll cut/paste. I don't have much more time for this.

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Originally posted by: flavio
Damn, you had to take it to a new thread. I replied in the other thread maybe I'll cut/paste. I don't have much more time for this.

Sorry I didn't think you'd respond. I'm glad you did though.

 

[GoingUp]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
All the anti-war movement says is "more time for inspectors". News flash: Without war Saddamn will NEVER go along with inspections fully and will always be bending the rules and sneaking things by.

The question is whether war is worth it as a last resort to disarm him. Because it is the last resort. There are no other ones. If you think it's worth it as a last resort then put that billboard down.

He had 8 years to try it the first time and nothing happened

 

[hagbard]

What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Well Hagbard what is the best foreign policy in this case then. How should we handle our foreign affairs, and how should we fight the war on terror? Should we do nothing at all? Should our president not try to protect America, or Canada, or the free world at all? Or better yet,

How would you protect the free world?

Give us a rundown of the Hagbard Foreign Policy. Give us all a plan so that we may solve this.

 

[Jimbo]

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Give us a rundown of the Hagbard Foreign Policy.

This should be good.

 

[Krk3561]

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

It's cause he's Canadian

 

[Jimbo]

Originally posted by: Krk3561

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

It's cause he's Canadian

He sounds like AnitaPeterson, I wonder what nationality she is?

 

[halik]

Violence breeds violence...Pure goals can never justify impure or violent action...They say the means are after all just means. I would say means are after all everything. As the means, so the end....If we take care of the means we are bound of reach the end sooner or later.
--Mahatma Gandhi

 

[AAjax]

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

I do find humor when foreign nationals decry the US as Imperialist, or as Empire-builders when their countries have actively participated in such work. As part of the British Empire Canadian units served all over the world in the service of the Empire. But what dose history have to do with anything?

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: ConclamoLudus

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Well Hagbard what is the best foreign policy in this case then. How should we handle our foreign affairs, and how should we fight the war on terror? Should we do nothing at all? Should our president not try to protect America, or Canada, or the free world at all? Or better yet,

How would you protect the free world?

Give us a rundown of the Hagbard Foreign Policy. Give us all a plan so that we may solve this.

Here it is in a nutshell....MYOFB. Do that, and you won't give terrorists a reason to line their sights up on you.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

Insult first, read never.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Krk3561

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

It's cause he's Canadian

Maybe I have a perspective that you don't.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Originally posted by: hagbard
What makes you think the anti-war movement gives a frig about disarming Iraq? I don't. Don't know of many who do. Its about putting a stop to US empire building.


Iraq policy is latter-day imperialism at work

Worse-case scenarios

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

Insult first, read never.

Here is some more for you to ignore. But if you really want to know what this war is really about, read them:

This comes from 1996, a policy paper created by Richard Perle:

A Clean Break:

This one from Israel's Haaretz newspaper on Tuesday:

U.S. official says Syria, Iran will be dealt with after Iraq war
U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton said in meetings with Israeli officials on Monday that he has no doubt America will attack Iraq, and that it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria, Iran and North Korea afterwards.
Haaretz.com

Its a proxy war, and the US is the proxy.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Krk3561

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

It's cause he's Canadian

Maybe I have a perspective that you don't.

Yeah...most people have their heads outside of their a$$.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Krk3561

Originally posted by: Jimbo

Wow hagbard, I KNEW you were an American hating tool, but I did not think you slipped that far into insanity.

It's cause he's Canadian

Maybe I have a perspective that you don't.

Yeah...most people have their heads outside of their a$$.

Unfortunately, it appears that too many people south of the border have their head in the sand and refuse to think for themselves. Oh, and have nothing but insults to offer those who disagree.

 

[etech]

Hagbard, from what you have posted I must assume that you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq.

Is that correct?

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: etech
Hagbard, from what you have posted I must assume that you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq.

Is that correct?

I support doing the same with him that the US did with Stalin when he was in power, or Pol Pot, etc. Unless, of course, the US intends to take out all of our present day tyrants. Which, of course, will only backfire.

Next phony question.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech
Hagbard, from what you have posted I must assume that you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq.

Is that correct?

I support doing the same with him that the US did with Stalin when he was in power, or Pol Pot, etc. Unless, of course, the US intends to take out all of our present day tyrants. Which, of course, will only backfire.

Next phony question.

waiting until saddam has nukes and rolls over saudi arabia isn't an answer.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech
Hagbard, from what you have posted I must assume that you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq.

Is that correct?

I support doing the same with him that the US did with Stalin when he was in power, or Pol Pot, etc. Unless, of course, the US intends to take out all of our present day tyrants. Which, of course, will only backfire.

Next phony question.

It's not a phony question.

Do you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq?

 

[Jimbo]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech
Hagbard, from what you have posted I must assume that you support leaving Saddam in power in Iraq.

Is that correct?

I support doing the same with him that the US did with Stalin when he was in power, or Pol Pot, etc. Unless, of course, the US intends to take out all of our present day tyrants. Which, of course, will only backfire.

Next phony question.

Yep! Your head is WAY up your ass. How old are you?

 

[dahunan]

Iraq defies weapons inspectors
By Anton La Guardia, Diplomatic Editor and David Blair in Baghdad
(Filed: 21/02/2003)


United Nations inspectors said yesterday that Iraq was breaking several of its promises to co-operate in their search for weapons of mass destruction.

The anouncement will greatly strengthening America and Britain as they seek international support for war.

The two countries are to table a new UN resolution next week declaring Iraq to be in "further material breach" of the last resolution. It is expected to demand that Saddam Hussein comply fully with the inspectors, or face war.

Apparently Saddam has been encouraged by anti-war rallies in the West and splits in the UN Security Council. He appears to be risking a highly critical verdict from the inspectors when they report again next week.

A pattern of defiance has emerged over the past fortnight, the inspectors say. No Iraqi scientist or official has agreed to be interviewed without a minder or tape recorder, despite Baghdad's promises that they would.

The issue is regarded as central to the inspectors' work, as scientists could reveal hidden stocks of chemical and biological weapons or prove that they had been destroyed.

The inspectors also accused Baghdad of failing to seek out more documents and banned weapons. It was a series of such promises from Iraq that led inspectors to issue a cautiously optimistic report to the Security Council last week.

The Full Story.... SADDAM LOVES The War Protesters because they give him more power